[jira] [Reopened] (YARN-4390) Do surgical preemption based on reserved container in CapacityScheduler

["Eric Payne (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-4390?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Eric Payne reopened YARN-4390:
------------------------------

The backport to 2.8 was a little tricky. I would like to reopen this JIRA, attach the 2.8 patch, and move the JIRA to Patch Available to trigger a 2.8 build.

> Do surgical preemption based on reserved container in CapacityScheduler
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: YARN-4390
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-4390
>             Project: Hadoop YARN
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>          Components: capacity scheduler
>    Affects Versions: 2.8.0, 2.7.3, 3.0.0-alpha1
>            Reporter: Eric Payne
>            Assignee: Wangda Tan
>             Fix For: 2.9.0, 3.0.0-alpha1
>
>         Attachments: QueueNotHittingMax.jpg, YARN-4390-design.1.pdf, YARN-4390-test-results.pdf, YARN-4390.1.patch, YARN-4390.2.patch, YARN-4390.3.branch-2.patch, YARN-4390.3.patch, YARN-4390.4.patch, YARN-4390.5.patch, YARN-4390.6.patch, YARN-4390.7.patch, YARN-4390.8.patch
>
>
> There are multiple reasons why preemption could unnecessarily preempt containers. One is that an app could be requesting a large container (say 8-GB), and the preemption monitor could conceivably preempt multiple containers (say 8, 1-GB containers) in order to fill the large container request. These smaller containers would then be rejected by the requesting AM and potentially given right back to the preempted app.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: yarn-issues-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: yarn-issues-help@hadoop.apache.org